January 2020 - address-policy-wg

Co-Chair re-election - Address policy WG
by Erik Bais 03 Feb '20

03 Feb '20

Dear WG, As time flies while we are having fun, it is almost the time to re-do the chair dance again. And this time it will be my seat that is up for a re-election. If the WG is willing to put up with me as a co-chair, that I'm more than willing to go for another 2 years. If someone would like to become co-chair of AP-WG, it is possible to send Gert an email and we can have an actual election ... If we don't have multiple candidates 1 month before the next RIPE meeting in Berlin, it will be a step down - step up process. ( most likely ) ... It would be nice if we would get a (third?) young WG chair, someone who has been to a couple meetings, but doesn't fall in the category .. old-white male .. that has been longer around than the initial IPv4 runout .. Both Gert and myself tend to fall in that category .. or are getting close to it .. and a young padiwan that we can help settle into the WG collective would be highly appreciated. Kind regards, Erik Bais Co-chair for Address Policy WG - RIPE

4 3

Policy Proposal Implemented: 2019-05 "Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs"
by Marco Schmidt 21 Jan '20

21 Jan '20

Dear colleagues, We are pleased to announce that we have fully implemented the RIPE Policy Proposal 2019-05 "Revised IPv4 assignment policy for IXPs”. This policy increased the reserved IPv4 pool for IXPs to a /15 and finetuned assignment criteria. The default IPv4 assignment size for IXP remains a /24 however on request or once there are no more assignments of /24 (or larger) available, assignments can be made down to /27. The pool management part of this proposal was already implemented in October 2019. The archived policy proposal can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-05 The RIPE Document, "IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region" is available at: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-733 Kind regards, Marco Schmidt Registration Services and Policy Development Assistant Manager RIPE NCC

1 0

2019-06 Review Phase Extended (Multiple Editorial Changes in IPv6 Policy)
by Marco Schmidt 21 Jan '20

21 Jan '20

Dear colleagues, Policy proposal 2019-06, "Multiple Editorial Changes in IPv6 Policy" is now in the extended Review Phase. This proposal aims to remove obsoleted text and simplify the IPv6 policy. You can find the full proposal and the RIPE NCC impact analysis at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-06 And the draft documents at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-06/draft As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this four week extended Review Phase is to continue discussing the proposal, taking the impact analysis into consideration, and to review the full draft RIPE Policy Document. At the end of the Review Phase, the Working Group (WG) Chairs will determine whether the WG has reached rough consensus. It is therefore important to provide your opinion, even if it is simply a restatement of your input from the previous phase. We encourage you to read the proposal, impact analysis and draft document and send any comments to <address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net> before 6 February 2020. Kind regards, Marco Schmidt Registration Services and Policy Development Assistant Manager RIPE NCC

13 13

2019-07 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Default assignment size for IXPs)
by Marco Schmidt 09 Jan '20

09 Jan '20

Dear colleagues, The policy proposal 2019-07, "Default assignment size for IXPs" has been withdrawn. This proposal aimed to change the default IXP assignment size from a /24 to a needs-based model, with a /27 as a minimum. The proposal is archived and can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/archived-policy-proposals/archive… Reason for withdrawal: The proposer felt that there was no clear direction on how to proceed with the proposal. Kind regards, Marco Schmidt Registration Services and Policy Development Assistant Manager RIPE NCC

1 0

FW: ASNs of organizations in reported IPv4 transfers
by Giotsas, Vasileios 07 Jan '20

07 Jan '20

Hello everyone, I'm a researcher from Lancaster University (UK) studying the IPv4 transfer market, and I'm trying to correlate IPv4 transfers with BGP routing dynamics. I've collected the reported transfers but they list only owner organizations names and not AS numbers (ASN). Same with the reported transfers of other RIRs. I tried to map the organization names to ASNs using WHOIS but I couldn’t find a match for about 50% of the organizations involved in transfers. What is the rationale behind not listing the AS number? Is it because organizations without an ASN (e.g. enterprise networks) can obtain an address? Is there a suggested way of mapping the organizations to ASNs besides WHOIS lookup? Thank you and best wishes for 2020! Vasileios Giotsas Lecturer School of Computing and Communications Lancaster University ☎ 01524 595130 https://bit.ly/LancsGiotsas

3 3